Game Show Network adopted the same arguments in...

status report filed in GSN’s commission case Thursday (http://bit.ly/1kekhwh). GSN and Tennis Channel are represented by Covington Burling cable attorney Stephen Weiswasser. GSN v. Cablevision had been put on hold to wait for the end of the Tennis Channel case. In both cases, Weiswasser has argued that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit decision against Tennis Channel in Comcast established a new standard of evidence for showing that a company had discriminated against another in program carriage. Though the D.C. Circuit decision never explicitly described a new test for evidence, the court decided against Tennis Channel because it never showed that Comcast didn’t have “a legitimate business purpose to treat unaffiliated program services differently from affiliated services,” said Weiswasser in the status report. That test “had never previously been articulated or applied by the Commission or the Presiding Judge,” said Weiswasser. Cablevision disagreed. The D.C. Circuit didn’t create new tests, but “merely assessed the well-developed trial record before it under the existing Commission standards,” said Cablevision’s status report. “No additional discovery is required and the case is trial ready, as it has been since June 25, 2013 when the matter was stayed to permit the appellate process in Comcast Cable to run its course.” GSN should be allowed to gather only information that updates the existing record to account for the time that has passed, Cablevision said. “GSN now seeks discovery on subjects that the parties have already thoroughly exhausted in document production and depositions.” Both parties have requested a Nov. 12 hearing.